Roundtable: “The EU’s Facilitation Directive: An opportunity to Rethink EU Counter-Smuggling Responses”
Closing remarks by Christina Meinecke, OHCHR Regional Representative for Europe —
Delivered at the roundtable on the revision of the EU Directive on the Facilitation of Irregular Migration.
The dialogue, jointly organised by the Office and Red Cross EU, gathered more than 50 experts from the UN and its human rights mechanisms, the European Commission, EU Members States and candidate countries, civil society, the legal community, humanitarian actors and scholars to discuss how to strengthen a human-rights based approach to anti-smuggling. Key takeaways from discussions have been summarised here, also with a view to inform ongoing reflections by EU co-legislators on the revision of the EU Directive on Facilitation of Irregular Migration, seen as an opportunity to better align existing rules with international standards and minimise all risk of criminalisation of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers facilitating their own journeys and those of their families, and of people acting in solidarity with them - as UN human rights mechanisms have recommended. OHCHR also shared a paper with recommendations to leverage regular migration pathways for human rights
We all share the objective of addressing this complex, global lucrative criminal industry which profits off, and often exacerbates, situations of extreme vulnerability and puts the lives and rights of so many people at risk.
At the same time, the evidence gathered over recent years—as reflected in our discussions today—shows that current approaches to counter-smuggling are not always producing the intended results. Much of our policy response has been driven by false assumptions: that those who resort to smuggling lack entitlement to regular travel; that smuggling networks are a primary pull factor for irregular migration; that humanitarian assistance to migrants, including search and rescue activities, are a pull factor for irregular migration. Too often, these false assumptions have been reinforced by broader dehumanising narratives around migration.
The consequence is that some measures introduced to stop smugglers, including criminal laws on facilitation, are, in practice, missing the target, and placing additional risks on people who are in need of human rights protection.
Under the current EU legal framework, and its national transpositions, the offence of facilitating irregular migration is often applied much too broadly. Insights from the experts who spoke today point to a clear pattern:
- Many individuals charged with smuggling have little or no connection to organised criminal networks.
- Migrants themselves—particularly those who steer a boat, drive a vehicle, or help family members travel—are being prosecuted for facilitating their own journeys and helping others at risk.
- Increasingly, ordinary citizens, civil society actors, and humanitarian organisations providing life-saving assistance are facing criminalisation.
- Meanwhile, the actual organised criminal groups exploiting people along migration routes remain, in many cases, largely unaffected, and are sometimes even favoured by over-criminalisation.
Today, as EUMSs and the European Parliament consider the European Commission’s proposal to revise the EU Directive on the Facilitation of Irregular Migration, EU legislators have a crucial opportunity to correct these shortcomings.
This revision is not merely a technical exercise. It is an opportunity to ensure a shift in the EU’s counter-smuggling framework, to firmly align it with international standards, with human rights obligations, commitments under key policy frameworks including the Global Compact for Migration, and with the practical realities on the ground.
To achieve this, I extracted three key recommendations emerging from our discussions:
Three key recommendations
- Align the facilitation offence with international standards on intent and profit. Criminal law should only target those who intentionally and materially profit from smuggling, whether for financial or other forms of gain.
- Include a binding humanitarian exemption. The revised Directive should clearly state that migrants, refugees, civil society organisations, or human rights defenders who facilitate their own journeys or those of others—for humanitarian reasons or on the basis of close family ties—cannot be criminalised. Consistent with the UN Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants, the absence of financial or material benefit must exclude such conduct from criminal liability. Migration is not a crime, and neither is solidarity aimed at ensuring people’s enjoyment of their human rights.
- Provide concrete protections for migrants in the context of smuggling. Provisions should include avenues for protection and support for smuggled migrants and for victims of trafficking in persons, by reference to existing EU frameworks on victims’ rights and safeguards that ensure individuals are not penalised for acts that stem from coercion or exploitation.
But even the best legal reforms will not succeed unless we also address the root causes that compel people to turn to smugglers in the first place.
The fundamental reality is clear: when safe and accessible pathways for regular migration are limited, people will resort to irregular routes—regardless of the risks and regardless of how aggressively smugglers are pursued. Reducing the demand for smuggling services requires the availability, accessibility and practical usability of regular, safe, and predictable migration pathways. This is the most effective, realistic, and humane strategy to undercut the business model of smuggling networks, while preventing and addressing vulnerabilities in migration.
We have strong evidence supporting this approach. The recent OHCHR paper on regular migration pathways highlights several practical models adopted by States—some already applied in Europe and beyond—that have contributed to reducing reliance on smugglers and enhancing protection. When scaled up, diversified, and improved, these models can deliver even greater impact:
- Humanitarian visas and corridors, providing direct and safe routes to protection.
- Labour mobility schemes expanding options for regular migration across different skill levels, reducing exposure to exploitative intermediaries.
- Expanded family reunification mechanisms, providing timely and accessible routes for families to be together and thereby preventing adults and children from having to rely on irregular journeys and smugglers.
A more balanced, evidence- and human rights-based approach to migrant smuggling—one that focuses on criminalising intent and profit, better protects smuggled migrants and those acting in solidarity with them, and also invests in regular pathways—will deliver better outcomes for States, for communities, and most importantly, for people.
