The S&D Group voted in favour of adopting the agreements, although a rapporteur, Silvie Guillaume, did not attend the vote on Montenegro. The European United Left group largely opposed the approval of both, although Spanish MEP Pernando Barena Arza did not vote on the agreement with Montenegro. The EU has negotiated five agreements with the Balkan states that allow Frontex operations on its territory, and most of the agreements have now been approved by both sides. This briefing note examines the main provisions of these agreements, highlights the main differences and similarities, and states that they are likely to serve as a model for future agreements with states that are not bordering the EU, as provided for in the 2019 Frontex Regulation. However, it should be said that Frontek`s liaison officers have been working in Serbia since last year, where the headquarters of the Organization`s Regional Coordination Office is also located, and that this agreement should regulate the position of their officers and working conditions in Serbia. Vollath, Parliament`s rapporteur, pointed out that negotiations with Serbia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Albania had led to differences between the different agreements with the EU. In accordance with Article 8 of the Agreements with Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina (Article 9 of the other Agreements), all parties are required: while the Agreements with Albania, Montenegro and North Macedonia contain the provision that the decision of the Executive Director is binding on the authorities of the host State, such an Article is not found in the Agreements with Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia. On the 29th. In January, the European Parliament`s Civil Liberties Committee (LIBE) approved agreements on the status of measures taken against the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) on the territory of two neighbouring non-EU states – Serbia and Montenegro. On 1 May, the agreement on the status of cooperation in border management between the European Union and Serbia will enter into force.

The agreement will allow the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) to conduct joint operations in Serbia, in particular in the event of sudden border management problems. Frontex will be able to deploy border guard teams and other experts to the borders between Serbia and neighbouring EU Member States, if necessary. The Agency`s 2016 mandate empowers the Agency to carry out activities in third countries bordering one of the External Borders of the Union. Under the 2019 Frontex Regulation, which entered into force on 4 December last year, the EU will be able to conclude such status agreements with non-neighbouring third countries. An overview of the most important points of the agreements can be found in the table at the end of this article or here in PDF. Belgrade, 20 September – Members of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency will be stationed at Serbia`s borders, as provided for in an agreement between Belgrade and Brussels that has not yet been ratified. (English version below) Meanwhile, the agreement with North Macedonia was due to be presented to the European Parliament this autumn, but negotiations have been delayed, partly because of Bulgaria`s objection to the language in which it is written. According to the European Western Balkans website, “Bulgaria does not recognize the language of North Macedonia as `Macedonian`, but “as a dialect of Bulgarian.” Apparently, “a change in the terminology relating to the Macedonian language will be necessary to allow progress in the development of a final negotiating framework.” Although negotiations have stalled, the agreement cannot be examined by the European Parliament. The parliamentary rapporteur for the agreements, Austrian MEP Bettina Vollath (Socialists & Democrats), uses the “explanatory notes” of the committee`s draft recommendation to indicate that if the agreements themselves are in line with the model EU status agreement on Frontex`s operations in third countries, future agreements should only be concluded after an assessment of the fundamental rights of the state concerned. Table: Comparison of the main points of the agreements (also available here in PDF) Green MEPs who voted against the status agreements with Serbia and Montenegro highlighted the dilemma of weighing the possible benefits of the presence of Frontex agents bound by fundamental rights obligations against the ideological and practical effects of outsourcing CONTROLS at the EU`s borders. Under each of the agreements with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia and Serbia, team members are not required to testify as witnesses.

The agreement with Montenegro not only omits this provision, but also underlines it: this agreement also stresses that `the members of the team referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3 to 6 do not include temporary agency workers`. The agreement with Serbia is the only agreement that does not contain any obligation for the agency and the home state of a team member to “refrain from any measure that could jeopardise any subsequent prosecution of the team member by the competent authorities” of the non-EU host state. The content of the status agreements, all of which are based on a model document prepared by the Commission, is very similar, with small but significant differences resulting from the procedures negotiated with the different States, which are discussed below. The agreement with Serbia was approved by the European Parliament in February this year, together with the agreement with Montenegro. .