The EU Commission’s proposal for a new Europol Regulation as part of the recast of the ‘Facilitator’s Package’ is a pretext for unchecked expansion of power and resources for Europol, the EU’s policing agency, at the expense of those they claim to protect.
The regulation has fallen at the first hurdle — with the Council tearing the proposal to shreds and the European Parliament set to follow suit.
The commission is framing these proposals as a humanitarian effort to “curb exploitation” by “ruthless smuggling gangs”, but this disguises a more insidious reality.
The reform hinges on the flawed premise that ‘smugglers’ pose the greatest risk to people on the move and that increased police powers and mass data collection will ensure ‘protection’.
In truth, this approach fuels harm and discrimination while granting the EU’s agencies like Europol and Frontex unprecedented surveillance capabilities with insufficient oversight.
Ursula von der Leyen’s speech and the commission’s documents on the package reference deaths at sea, blaming “smugglers” for the death toll of over 28,000 people since 2014, citing International Organization for Migration (IOM) data.
However, the IOM itself highlights “gaps in search-and-rescue capacity and restrictions on the life-saving work of NGOs” as key contributing factors — conveniently ignored in the commission’s interpretation.
A recent UN report found that state authorities, including police and border guards, are often the main perpetrators of violence against people on the move, not ‘smugglers’.
The EU’s own hostile border and migration policies force people into life-threatening situations. Deaths at sea, and on land, result from a lack of safe, regular pathways into the EU. Instead of addressing these root causes, the commission is doubling down on a failed approach, empowering agencies and criminalising movement and solidarity. This will push people into even more dangerous routes, while authorities committing abuses continue to operate with impunity.
The proposed reform significantly impacts digital and migrants rights by expanding Europol’s data collection on people on the move.
New rules would require national law enforcement authorities to share all data related to ‘migrant smuggling’ with Europol.
Historically, it has been notoriously difficult to access personal data by Europol, even for activists and human rights defenders from the Global North. The impact on racialised migrant populations will be even more severe.
This mass data collection contradicts established data protection standards, raising red flags from the EU’s data protection watchdog. Additionally, we can expect these vast datasets will be analysed by AI algorithms too, which are known to be racist and discriminatory, to ‘produce knowledge’ on migration. Information derived from such models could be used to justify increased policing forces to border regions, leading to more pushbacks, violence and deaths.
In the end, who profits from all this? Not people on the move, not those in solidarity with them, but private industries and research institutions receiving EU funding to develop surveillance technologies.
Compounding these concerns, the commission sidestepped key democratic safeguards in its proposal. The required impact assessment, meant to evaluate the implications of EU action - notably on fundamental rights, was conspicuously absent. This omission, which UN Special Rapporteur Mary Lawlor called “shocking”, undermines transparency and accountability in policymaking.
Europol's history of overreach is well-documented. Reforms in 2016 and 2022 steadily increased its powers, allowing the agency to amass vast amounts of personal data with minimal oversight.
The 2023 proposal goes even further, expanding cooperation between Europol and Frontex, the EU border agency infamous for human rights violations. It would allow Europol agents to be seconded into Frontex teams.
Currently, Frontex cannot share migrants’ data with Europol en-masse.
However, both agencies attempted to circumvent this restriction with the 2015 PeDRA project (‘Processing of Personal Data for Risk Analysis). This effort to conduct mass surveillance of migrants stalled following an investigation and scrutiny from the EU’s Data Protection Supervisor. The new Europol Regulation risks creating a legal framework for enhanced data-sharing between Europol and Frontex, sidestepping previous challenges.
Under the current Polish EU Council presidency, "Security, Europe!" has been touted as a guiding motto, with new EU migration commissioner Magnus Brunner declaring it a “fundamental right”. This focus on security sidelines fundamental rights to asylum, life, and freedom from inhumane treatment.
History has shown that restrictive migration policies do not work - people will continue to move.
Rather than investing billions into repressive border regimes, offshore detention centres, and surveillance powers, the EU must pursue sustainable and viable alternatives.
Civil society, policymakers, and EU citizens must reject these measures and demand a fundamental shift in how migration is approached. Human mobility is not a crime, and scapegoating migrants and their allies for the EU’s systemic failures must end.
Hope Barker is an independent researcher with a focus on border surveillance technologies, Caterina Rodelli is EU policy analyst at Access Now, Chloé Berthélémy is senior policy advisor at European Digital Rights, Stefi Richani is advocacy lead for Equinox: Racial Justice Initiative, and Antonella Napolitano is advocacy advisor at the Hermes Center.
Hope Barker is an independent researcher with a focus on border surveillance technologies, Caterina Rodelli is EU policy analyst at Access Now, Chloé Berthélémy is senior policy advisor at European Digital Rights, Stefi Richani is advocacy lead for Equinox: Racial Justice Initiative, and Antonella Napolitano is advocacy advisor at the Hermes Center.