Date: Wednesday, 25 June 2025

Remote (webex)

Present

Frontex

Two representatives from the Public Access to Documents Team

Three representatives from Inspection and Control Office

Six representatives from Return Division

Procurement Officer

The European Ombudsman

Jennifer King, Legal Expert

Tereza Mandjukova, Inquiries Officer

Paulien Van de Velde-Van Rumst, Inquiries Officer

Nika Bobek, Inquiries Trainee

Background

The case is about how Frontex dealt with a request for public access to documents concerning Joint Return Operations (JROs) and National Return Operations (NROs) coordinated by Frontex for the period 1 July 2024 to 31 December 2024.

Purpose of the meeting

The purpose of the meeting was for the Ombudsman inquiry team to obtain a better understanding of how Frontex dealt with the complainant’s request, in particular, how it identified the documents falling within the scope of the request and how it applied the exceptions for the protected interests under Article 4 of Regulation 1049/2001.

Introduction and procedural information

The Ombudsman inquiry team introduced themselves, thanked the Frontex representatives for meeting with them and set out the purpose of the meeting. They outlined the legal framework that applies to meetings held by the Ombudsman, in particular, that the Ombudsman would not disclose any information identified by Frontex as confidential, neither to the complainant nor to any other person outside the Ombudsman’s Office, without Frontex’s prior consent.^[1]

The inquiry team explained that they would draw up a draft report on the meeting to be sent to Frontex to ensure that the contents were factually accurate and complete. The meeting report would then be finalised, included in the file and provided to the complainant. No confidential information would be included in the report or otherwise provided to the complainant or any third party.

Information exchanged

The Frontex representatives stated that the handling of the request for public access, whereby it provided wide partial access to raw data extracted from its database, illustrates Frontex’s commitment to the principle of openness and providing the widest access possible while safeguarding its activities.

The Frontex representatives explained that at the time of the request the operational period for the Returns Operational Plan 2024 was still ongoing.[2] The evaluation period for activities implemented in operational year 2024 is still ongoing at the time of the meeting. It is difficult to provide a timeline for the evaluation period as this process involves multiple stakeholders, culminating in the Management’s Board approval. This process usually takes between three and six months.

As indicated in the confirmatory decision, once the evaluation period is over, Frontex may reconsider its position. However, Frontex representatives also explained that unlike its activities concerning specific joint operations (JOs), its mandate and activities relating to return operations remained, in principle, the same throughout the years. Therefore, it is reasonable that the 2025 Returns Operational Plan builds on the previous Operational Plans. Therefore, any disclosure of the 2024 Returns Operational Plan would have to take into consideration the impact on the ongoing 2025 Returns Operational Plan.

The Ombudsman inquiry team sought to clarify how Frontex identified and categorised the documents concerning the 2024 Returns Operational Plan. Frontex representatives explained that they interpreted the scope very broadly and understood the request as referring to all documents relating to Frontex’s return activities in 2024. The identification of documents (46 documents) illustrates this wide interpretation, shows the complexity of the matter and Frontex’s commitment to transparency.

The Ombudsman inquiry team sought to clarify how disclosure of some specific parts of the sample of documents inspected would harm the public interest as regards public security. In particular the Ombudsman inquiry team noted that some parts of the documents are descriptive in nature or contain generic content. The Frontex representatives acknowledged that some parts are descriptive in nature but explained that certain general information could reveal the modus operandi as it could result in understanding the support Frontex provides to Member States in return operations.

The Ombudsman inquiry team also asked why in some documents concerned, the nationality of the returnees was redacted. Frontex stated that its role in return operations is to assist Member States. It is required to do so while respecting fundamental rights and international standards. However, the competent national authorities of a Member State are responsible for the final individual return decision. In light of its mandate, Frontex actively collects information on the destination of the return operations which was shared with the complainant, while retrieving information on the nationality of the returnees would require exceeding a simple routine search and compiling content of various documents thereby creating a new document. Even if retrievable, disclosure of the nationality of the returnees would be detrimental to the public security and international relations.

The Ombudsman inquiry team sought to clarify how Frontex applied the exception related to the protection of commercial interests, in particular as regards the identity of the beneficiaries in the grant agreements and the general conditions that were annexed to these agreements. The Frontex representatives explained that as regards the identity of the beneficiaries, this information is generally considered to be sensitive and must be protected to preserve its ability to conclude future agreements. In terms of the general conditions applicable to the grant agreements (Annex I), Frontex clarified that this document was identified as an Annex to the 2024 Returns Operational Plan.[3]

Conclusion of the meeting

The Ombudsman inquiry team thanked the Frontex representatives for their time and for the explanations provided and the meeting ended.

Brussels/Strasbourg, 30 June 2025

 

Jennifer King                                                                                                                                 Tereza Mandjukova

Legal Expert                                                                                                                                   Inquiries Officer

 

[1] Article 4.8 of the European Ombudsman’s Implementing Provisions.

[2] The operational period does not coincide with the calendar year but runs from the end of January in year N to the end of January in N+1.

[3] Document 35 as listed in the confirmatory decision (SAP RS Annex 5a General conditions to grant agreement).