
EUROPEAN UNION COURTS
FM v Frontex
Challenging Frontex’s Aerial Surveillance Activities and Complicity in Pullbacks to Libya
Court
General Court of the European Union
Case
T-511/24 — FM v Frontex
Filed
4 October 2024
Legal basis
Article 265 TFEU · Article 46(4), Regulation 2019/1896
Status
Pending
Supported by
Digital Freedom Fund. Refugees in Libya . Front-LEX
Refugees in Libya and front-LEX filed a legal notice pursuant to Art. 265 TFEU requesting Frontex’s Executive Director, Mr. Hans Leijtens, to partially terminate the Agency’s aerial surveillance activities in the ‘pre-frontier area’ in the Central Mediterranean.
To prevent asylum seekers fleeing crimes against humanity in Libya from reaching the EU, Frontex systematically and unlawfully transmits the geolocalisation of refugee boats at high seas to the Libyan Coast Guard/Libyan Militia. Every day, Frontex allows for the systematic interception and ‘pulling back’ of refugees to Libya, from where they have managed to escape by the skin of their teeth, and where they are subjected once more to crimes against humanity. Now, front-LEX, on behalf of X.Y. a refugee trapped in Libya, brings an unprecedented legal challenge against Frontex’s airborne complicity.
Between 2021 and 2023, Frontex has shared 2,200 emails communicating the exact geolocalisation data of refugee boats with Libyan actors to enable their unlawful interception and forcible return back to Libya. There, the ‘pulled back’ refugees are arbitrarily detained and subjected to crimes against humanity of, inter alia, murder, enforced disappearance, torture, enslavement, sexual violence, rape, and other inhumane acts. It is Frontex’s sharing of geolocalisation data which enables the commission of these crimes – making the Agency complicit in the ongoing and systematic attack directed against refugees and asylum seekers in the Central Mediterranean.
Frontex’s complicity in these ‘pullbacks’ and ensuing crimes against humanity committed against refugees has been well-documented by leading human rights organisations, UN organs, and investigative journalists. Now, based on this clear-cut evidence, Refugees in Libya and front-LEX filed an unprecedented legal notice challenging the Agency’s airborne complicity in crimes against humanity committed against people on the move.
UPDATE – October 2024
In October 2024, Refugees in Libya and front-LEX filed a groundbreaking legal action for failure to act before the Court of Justice of the European Union (The General Court) on behalf of FM, a young asylum seeker from Sudan stranded in Libya, with no access to an asylum procedure or any form of protection from the crimes against humanity committed against migrants there. The case seeks to hold Frontex accountable for its complicity in the systematic interception and ‘pulling back’ of refugees to Libya, from where they have managed to escape by the skin of their teeth, and where they are subjected once more to crimes against humanity.
After fleeing persecution in Sudan, FM lives in hiding in Libya. He was recently diagnosed with a serious illness and lacks access to medical care, shelter, or basic safety. Upon his imminent and unavoidable crossing of the Central Mediterranean in search of international protection, and like thousands of other migrants and refugees intercepted at sea, he faces the risk of being detected by Frontex, handed over to Libyan entities, and, upon his forced disembarkation in Libya, being subjected to arbitrary detention, torture, sexual violence, and even death in Libyan detention camps. While every migrant in Libya is at risk of being arbitrary detained and subjected to crimes against humanity, this risk is exponentially higher for those intercepted at sea by Libyan entities. Thus, FM’s only chance to protect his life is to cross the Mediterranean, but to do so he needs to be sure that he won’t be detected by Frontex.
As our legal filing outlines, Frontex claims that its one and only legal obligation is to inform the “responsible” rescue coordination centre — which in many parts of the central Mediterranean is nominally Libyan. But this is a legal fiction: Frontex has more than one legal obligation, and among them is a prohibition on returning persons to places where they will face persecution or torture. This obligation derives from EU primary law and is constitutional in nature.
Without Frontex’s aerial surveillance activities and communications infrastructure, Libyan authorities would not be able to detect refugee boats at sea. FM v. Frontex seeks a declaration that Frontex unlawfully failed to act and to fulfil its obligations under Article 46(4) of its founding Regulation, by not suspending or terminating the unlawful provision of information to Libyan entities on the location of refugee boats fleeing crimes against humanity in Libya.
UPDATE – April 2025
The General Court has decided to reserve its decision on Frontex’s plea of inadmissibility until it rules on the substance of the case. For the first time in such judicial proceedings brought by victims of its activities, the Agency will be required to submit a Defence to our corroborated allegations, and the Court will examine the substance of the case. This is a critical step in advancing accountability for the agency’s illegal practices.
Latest
MEDIA COVERAGE / ADVOCACY
OHCHR / UNSMIL
Business as Usual: Human Rights Violations and Abuses against Migrants, Asylum-Seekers, and Refugees in Libya
UN report documenting widespread and systematic violations against migrants, asylum seekers and refugees in Libya, including refoulement, arbitrary detention, torture, trafficking and impunity; part of the evidentiary context cited around FM v Frontex.
Feb 17, 2026
Verfassungsblog
Frontex Under Scrutiny: Hamoudi’s Burden Shifting Precedent and Its Implications for FM v Frontex
Legal analysis of how the CJEU’s Hamoudi judgment may affect FM v Frontex, including evidentiary burdens, Frontex’s independent fundamental-rights obligations and alleged complicity through aerial surveillance and data sharing.
Feb 13, 2026
elDiario.es
El sudanés que ha llevado a Frontex ante la Justicia: “Morir en el mar es más compasivo que seguir atrapado en Libia”
Interview and detailed profile of the Sudanese applicant behind FM v Frontex, his life in hiding in Libya, medical vulnerability and challenge to Frontex’s cooperation with Libyan actors.
Aug 7, 2025
InfoMigrants (press review copy)
Lampedusa : plus de 1 600 arrivées en 5 jours “avec l’amélioration des conditions météorologiques”, note Frontex
French-language coverage of Frontex aerial surveillance in the Central Mediterranean that also recalls the legal challenge seeking an end to surveillance practices facilitating returns to Libya.
May 1, 2025
Fanpage.it
“Frontex complice dei respingimenti illegali in Libia”, la denuncia delle Ong alla Corte di giustizia Ue
Detailed Italian coverage of FM v Frontex featuring Refugees in Libya, the 2,200 geolocation communications and allegations that Frontex facilitates interceptions and forced returns to Libya.
Dec 19, 2024
EUR-Lex / Official Journal of the European Union
Case T-511/24: Action brought on 4 October 2024 – FM v Frontex
Official EU publication of the action for failure to act, setting out FM’s request that the General Court find Frontex unlawfully failed to suspend or terminate activities resulting in information being provided to Libyan entities.
Nov 25, 2024
Público
Frontex retuerce el derecho humanitario para zafarse de un caso judicial y alega que cruzar el mar en busca de asilo es ilegal
Exclusive Spanish reporting on Frontex’s response to the legal challenge, including its arguments about irregular crossings and the protection claims of the Sudanese applicant.
Nov 1, 2024
Make a donation
Help Us Carry These Cases Forward
Refugees in Libya’s pursuit of justice depends on sustained documentation, legal work, survivor participation and the ability to bring evidence before courts and accountability mechanisms. Your support helps us continue challenging impunity and accompanying those seeking justice.
Frequency
One time
Weekly
Monthly
Yearly
Amount
€10
€25
€50
€100
€200
€1,000
Other
0/100
Comment (optional)







