The auditors also stress that there is no need to account for the efficiency and costs of Frontex. Although Frontex communicates extensively about its activities, it rarely analyses its performance or the impact of its activities. Nor does it provide information on the actual costs of its joint operations. The auditors concluded that there is a significant risk that Frontex will experience difficulties in fulfilling its mandate under Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 and made several recommendations to the Agency and the European Commission in this regard. Frontex was founded in 2004 to work with national authorities to tackle EU border issues, such as terrorism, trafficking in human beings and smuggling of migrants. Frontex`s mandate has gradually expanded since its creation, as has its budget (from €19 million in 2006 to €460 million last year). Nevertheless, EU auditors found that Frontex still does not provide adequate support to Member States in the management of the EU`s external borders. Auditors said Frontex`s support to EU member states was “not enough to fight illegal immigration and cross-border crime”. The EU`s border management agency, Frontex, has not been effective enough to help member states and Schengen associated countries manage the EU`s external borders, according to a special report published by the European Court of Auditors (ECA).
Frontex`s support is not enough to fight illegal immigration and cross-border crime, the auditors said. Not only did the auditors conclude that Frontex had not fully implemented the mandate it had received in 2016, but they also doubted its ability to effectively implement the new operational role assigned to it. Brincat said auditors found that even before these additional tasks were defined, Frontex “had more (biting) than it could chew.” As regards Frontex`s mandate to combat illegal immigration and cross-border crime, the auditors identified gaps and inconsistencies in the exchange of information that affect the ability of Frontex and the Member States to monitor the external borders and, where necessary, to respond to them. In addition, it was found that risk analysis and vulnerability assessment activities are not always supported by comprehensive and high-quality data. Finally, the Court concluded that joint cross-border crime operations are not yet sufficiently developed in Frontex`s day-to-day activities. He said the implementation of the auditors` recommendations “requires a joint effort by Frontex, the European Commission and national authorities”. European Union auditors on Monday criticised the EU`s border agency, saying it was so overburdened in terms of resources that it was unable to carry out its duties. “However, a closer look at the Court of Auditors` assessment also makes it clear that some of the open points go beyond frontex`s sphere of influence and depend to a large extent on the often inadequate and, above all, inconsistent behaviour of Member States,” Düpont continued. Presenting a report on the Agency`s work to help EU countries manage Europe`s external borders, lead auditor Leo Brincat told reporters: “Frontex is currently not doing its duty effectively, and we found this even more worrying at a time when Frontex is being given additional responsibilities.” Although the European Court of Auditors, whose task is to monitor the collection and use of EU funds and to improve the EU`s financial management, considers Frontex`s tasks to be “essential for the fight against cross-border crime and illegal immigration”, the audit notes that “Frontex is currently not effectively fulfilling this obligation. This is particularly worrying at a time when Frontex is being given additional responsibilities. The Court notes that the last external evaluation of Frontex`s operations was carried out in 2015 and did not cover Frontex`s mandate as defined in the 2016 Regulation.
In 2019, the Court examined Frontex`s return measures in Special Report No 24/2019 on migration management in Greece and Italy. Later this year, the Court will present audit reports on the EU`s policy on the return of migrants and the fight against migrant smuggling. As part of this audit, we assessed whether Frontex had actually carried out four of its six main activities in order to contribute to the implementation of European integrated border management and thus to help Member States prevent, detect and combat illegal immigration and cross-border crime. We also examined Frontex`s willingness to fulfil its new and expanded mandate for 2019. The EPP Group wants FRONTEX, the European Border and Coast Guard, to implement the recommendations of the European Court of Auditors in order to become stronger and more efficient in the management of Europe`s external borders. The audit makes five recommendations to Frontex. By the end of the year, Frontex should carry out a formal analysis to identify staffing needs and improve internal communication procedures. Frontex has been plagued by controversy in recent years.
The EPP Group is the largest group in the European Parliament with 178 members from all EU Member States We have concluded that Frontex`s support to the Member States/Schengen associated countries is not effective enough in the fight against illegal immigration and cross-border crime. We found that Frontex had not fully implemented its mandate for 2016 and highlighted several risks related to Frontex`s mandate for 2019. The Warsaw-based agency has nearly 10,000 civil servants and a budget that is expected to reach €900 million ($1 billion) by 2027, up from just €19 million in 2006. Special report of the European Court of Auditors in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 287(4) TFEU. “Frontex is aware of the need for improvements and has worked hard to make the Agency stronger and more efficient. Unfortunately, many of the issues raised are related to external factors beyond the agency`s control,” Borowski said. After the refugee crisis in 2015, governments relied on Frontex to stem the flow of migrants to Europe. . The report does not cover Frontex`s activities in the field of return, but focuses on situation monitoring, risk analysis, vulnerability assessments and the Agency`s operational response.
.