The EU Migration Policy on Preventing Smuggling of Migrants at Sea

EU claims to develop migration policy preventing smuggling of migrants, but why does the UN has claims this policy of preventing smuggling as threatening the lives of rescued at at sea? Here aiming to find out the solution and legal basis for both positions we need to distinguish legal grounds. So is it obvious that UN and EU positions and opinions contradicts each other. Both claim to be based on legal grounds. Who is right or wrong? These solutions are of high importance for EU countries, because it influences security and economy of the EU member states. If some countries disagree with EU decisions, and it may lead to break down of the EU itself. As long as people have no doubts in legality of EU decisions, the idea of EU commonwealth is supported by EU members and policy of EU supposed to have legal basis. The world was seeing a massive growth in media reports on trafficking, people smuggling, illegal migration, and asylum – seeking for so called rescued refugees at sea. But there is not a great deal of common understanding of these terms, in fact they are often used synonymously. Since these all different phenomena, synonymous usage is far from accurate. And importantly the differences between the phenomena have a profound impact on the way both perpetrators and victims are viewed and treated. It is critical in policy making process to differentiate between the concepts, in order to better distinguish between who is a victim of trafficking, and who is an asylum-seeker, and who is an illegal migrant. Aim Investigating does the European Union's policy on Mediterranean Sea rescues preventing smuggling of migrants breaches international standards, as UN representatives claim, is it based on legal grounds, there is a need to analyse the current legal framework for resolving international disputes regarding refugees rescued at sea with the aim of identifying any gaps, inconsistencies, ambiguities, vagueness or inadequacies associated with treatment of persons/refugees rescued at sea. Identified potential problems and gaps may be solved by EU policy‘s future decisions which may enable the improvement of the EU preventing smuggling of the migrants policy-making process and after making up conclusions to present proposals for policy making decisions. Questions: Does the recognition of the ‘right to be rescued at sea’ under International Law apply for illegally smuggled migrants and victims of human trafficking? Do the obligations imposed on ship-masters, flag states, coastal states and transit states are the same in cases of rescues at sea, smuggling of illegal migrants and human trafficking cases? Does the illegal migrant being smuggled should obtain the status of rescued at sea person? Does the existing rules of International law and EU policy decisions on preventing smuggling provide the same status of the asylum seeker for refugees rescued at sea even if these persons are the victims of human trafficking or actually are illegally smuggled migrants? Were the EU and member states policy responses to migrant smuggling adequate under existing International Law?