Executive Director European Border and Coast Guard Agency

 

Dear Mr X,

I have received a complaint against the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex).

In January 2025, the complainant, a researcher, asked 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.

In February 2025, Frontex issued its initial decision. Frontex identified 232 documents as falling within the scope of the request. Frontex provided partial access to 62 documents,[1] arguing that further disclosure would undermine the protection of the public interest as regards public security [2] and international relations,[3] as well as the commercial interests of legal persons, including intellectual property,[4] and Frontex’s decision-making process.[5] Frontex refused access to the remaining 170 documents in their entirety, as it considered that the administrative burden involved in carrying out the required redactions would be disproportionate, undermining the principle of sound administration.

The complainant made a confirmatory application, arguing that Frontex failed to substantiate sufficiently its position and to explain how disclosure would actually undermine the protected interests. The complainant also considered that there was an overriding public interest in disclosure in order to hold the EU accountable in the area of return operations.

In April 2025, at confirmatory stage, Frontex identified additional documents (grant agreements) and 123 additional final return operation reports. Frontex provided partial access to the additionally identified grant agreements. Frontex also provided an updated link to a document containing information about the 245 final return operation reports. Frontex maintained its position as to the remainder of the documents.[6]

I have decided to open an inquiry into the complaint against Frontex’s decision to refuse access under Regulation 1049/2001.

As a first step, I consider it necessary for my inquiry team to meet with the relevant representatives of Frontex to discuss the handling of the complainant’s request.

I would be grateful if your office could contact Ms Tereza Mandjukova, who is in charge of this inquiry, to agree the arrangements for the inspection and meeting to take place before 30 June 2025.

In addition, I have decided that it is necessary to inspect a sample of the documents falling within the scope of the inquiry. The annex to this letter contains a list of documents for inspection.

The documents, preferably in electronic format through encrypted e-mail,[7] should be sent prior to the meeting and by 15 June 2025 at the latest.

Information or documents that Frontex considers to be confidential will not be disclosed to the complainants or any other person without its prior agreement.[8]

Yours sincerely,

Teresa Anjinho
European Ombudsman

Strasbourg, 28/05/2025

 

Annex:

List of documents for inspection:

Return operations:

1. RO-03128 (marked version)

2. RO-03124 (marked version)

3. RO-02833

4. RO-02985

5. RO-02978

6. RO-03006

7. RO-03107

8. RO-03142

9. RO-03045

10. RO-03080

Returns Operational Plan for 2024

1. FRESO SAP 2024 final

2. ROP 2024 final

3. RS SAP final

4. FOA-R 2024 Annex 5 standard Operating Procedure use of force reporting

5. SAP RS Annex 5a General conditions to grant agreement

Grant agreements (non-“expunged” and, if possible, marked versions)

1. SC2 OP790_2023 signed by both parties _ draft redaction_print

2. 2023_402_RET_redacted

3. 2023_470_RET_redacted

4. 2023_434_RET_AM1_redacted

5. 2024_218_RET

 

[1] Specifically, one excel table “RET JRO and NRO data for 2024 PAD 2025-00004 – Copy”, 59 “expunged” documents (grant agreements) and two  “Final Return Operation reports”.

[2] Article 4(1)(a) first indent, of Regulation 1049/2001, available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2001/1049/oj/eng.

[3] Article 4(1)(a) third indent, of Regulation 1049/2001,

[4] Article 4(2) first indent of Regulation 1049/2001.

[5] Article 4(3) of Regulation 1049/2001.

[6] At confirmatory stage, Frontex did not invoke the exception for the protection of its decision-making.

[7] Encrypted emails can be sent to our dedicated mailbox.

[8] Please clearly mark such material ‘Confidential’. Information and documents of this kind will be deleted from the European Ombudsman’s files shortly after the inquiry has ended.