Airborne Monthly Factsheet Juli 2021

01.07., distress case A, with 30 persons: Frontex drone likely involved, attempted interception by the so-called Libyan Coast Guard in the Maltese (!) Search-and-Rescue (SAR) zone, rescue by a civilian vessel. The people in distress called the initiative Watch The Med – Alarm Phone, which immediately alerted the authorities. The NGO vessel Ocean Viking2, and the NGO aircraft Colibri 2****, as well as our aircraft Seabird, were heading towards the position. Meanwhile, Seabird’s crew observed a so-called Libyan Coast Guard patrol boat also heading at full speed in the direction of the people. The so-called Libyan Coast Guard and the NGO vessel Ocean Viking were both around 10 nautical miles (nm)***** away from the people when Seabird’s crew found the people in the Maltese SAR zone. The patrol boat was later overheard urging the Ocean Viking to “change course”. Around twenty minutes later, the so-called Libyan Coast Guard patrol boat was spotted heading away from the people. Seabird’s ground crew tried on two occasions to call the Maltese authorities: the first time, the officer took the information and stated that he was “only the operator” and refused to forward the ground crew to the “duty officer” since he/she was “busy” and “currently handling other cases”. The second time, the officer tried to forward ground crew to the duty officer but “the call didn’t go through”. Around 30 minutes later, the so-called Libyan Coast Guard and the Ocean Viking were both on scene with the people in distress. The boat in distress was firstly near the so-called Libyan Coast Guard patrol boat, and then heading towards the Ocean Viking. In the end, the people were rescued by the NGO vessel Ocean Viking and disembarked in Augusta on 09th-10th of July.

Through a monitoring of Frontex’s drone’s track, we have to assume that Frontex’s drone was involved in the attempted pullback. When the ground crew called Libyan authorities in the morning, the Libyan officers shared two positions which they had received “one hour ago”. One of these positions coincided with a position around which Frontex was orbiting and where the people in distress case A may have been. Hence we have strong reasons to believe that Frontex again attempted to coordinate a pullback to Libya.

03.07., empty boat with so-called Libyan Coast Guard patrol boat in the vicinity, likely results of an interception coordinated by Frontex. Seabird’s crew spotted an empty boat without an engine at the boundary between the Libyan and Maltese SAR zone. Two patrol vessels of the so-called Libyan Coast Guard were also observed in the vicinity, one having around 20 persons on its deck. The Frontex drone was observed orbiting the position of the said boat in distress shortly beforehand. We have to assume that Frontex coordinated the interception and the consequent pullback to Libya.

04.07., distress case F, with 10 persons: people trying to escape the so-called Libyan Coast Guard, a witnessed interception and consequent pullback to Libya from the Maltese (!) SAR zone. Seabird’s crew spotted 10 persons in distress in the Maltese (!) SAR zone, who were trying to escape from the so-called Libyan Coast Guard patrol boat 648. Ultimately the people were intercepted and pulled back to Libya by the so-called Libyan Coast Guard.

07.07., distress cases G and H, both respectively with 10 people: Frontex drone orbits in the Libyan and Maltese SAR zones, a merchant vessel heading to a boat in distress. Moonbird’s ground crew observed Frontex’s drone orbiting mainly within the Maltese SAR zone. Arriving on site, Moonbird’s crew spotted two boats in distress. A merchant vessel, the Iver Agile, flying the Italian flag, received positions provided by Moonbird’s crew and said that they were heading to the people. The vessel also informed the port authorities of Lampedusa on the radio. The people arrived in Lampedusa, likely independently.

13.07., distress case i, 81 persons, 3 deaths: one merchant vessel involved, a NATO Turkish navy vessel and helicopter monitoring the people in distress, delay in rendering assistance by the Maltese authorities. The people in distress called the initiative Watch The Med – Alarm Phone, which immediately informed the authorities. Moonbird’s crew later spotted the people adrift in the Maltese SAR zone. The oil tanker Chembulk Barcelona, flying the flag of the Marshall Islands, was instructed by the Maltese Rescue Coordination Centre (RCC) to proceed to the people. One hour later, a Turkish NATO warship****** called Moonbird’s crew on the radio, stating that they were monitoring the situation and would send an aircraft. Indeed, a few minutes later a helicopter arrived on-scene. The merchant vessel Chembulk Barcelona was instructed by the Maltese RCC to “observe and report back”. Later, the vessel informed Moonbird’s crew that the Maltese authorities were coordinating and had launched a rescue boat. Meanwhile, the merchant vessel Titan, flying the flag of Moldova, was also in the vicinity and approaching the people, however an attempted contact from Moonbird’s crew on the radio was unsuccessful. Around 3 hours and 40 minutes after Moonbird’s ground crew alerted authorities, and more than 9 hours after Alarm Phone’s first alert to the Maltese and Italian authorities, the Chembulk Barcelona informed Moonbird’s crew that there were “3 people in the water” – who could not be spotted by Moonbird’s crew – and that the vessel would assist them but not rescue them, as ordered by the Maltese RCC. The Titan was now heading away from the people in distress. Ultimately, the people were rescued by the Armed Forces of Malta. Local media reported that there were 3 dead bodies recovered – deaths which could have been avoided.*******

On 21.07., Moonbird’s crew spotted 6 boats in distress, carrying around 247 persons, all of them in the Maltese SAR zone. Four boats likely arrived in Lampedusa autonomously or were rescued by the Italian authorities and disembarked in Italy, while the outcomes for two boats remain unknown.

22.07., distress case Q, with around 150 persons: a merchant vessel monitors a boat in distress but does not rescue. The persons in the boat called the initiative Watch the Med – Alarm Phone, which informed the authorities. Moonbird’s crew later spotted the people in the Libyan SAR zone, not wearing any life vests. The boat was banking to one side and was therefore at a high risk of capsizing, and the people were bailing water out of the boat. Moonbird’s crew decided to send out a mayday relay******** in order to urge any vessel in the vicinity to immediately render assistance. The oil tanker Meteora, flying the Italian flag, was in the vicinity and replied to Moonbird’s crew that they had dangerous cargo on board and would inform the Italian authorities of the situation. Moonbird’s crew then observed the Meteora changing its course towards the people. The Libyan authorities informed us that an “asset” was on its way. Moonbird’s crew later overheard the Meteora exchanging with the Tunisian Coast Guard. The merchant vessel declared themselves in need of assistance to rescue the people. When Moonbird left scene, the so-called Libyan Coast Guard were approaching the people and had deployed a RHIB********* towards the people. The outcome for this boat remains uncertain.

On 23.07., Moonbird’s crew spotted 10 boats in distress carrying around 350 persons – including 2 “convoys” respectively of 2 and 3 boats. The outcomes for 8 boats in distress spotted in the Maltese SAR zone remain unknown. Two boats in distress which were in the Libyan SAR zone were intercepted by the so-called Libyan Coast Guard.

23.07., illegal transshipment of around 200 persons from the merchant vessel Vos Aphrodite to a so-called Libyan Coast Guard patrol boat, almost one month after Vos Triton’s transshipment. Moonbird’s crew spotted a so-called Libyan Coast Guard patrol boat alongside the offshore supply vessel Vos Aphrodite**********, flying the flag of Gibraltar. Around 200 persons had been transshipped from the Vos Aphrodite to the so-called Libyan Coast Guard.

This illegal transshipment happens almost a month after a similar act of complicity in human rights violations perpetuated by the Vos Triton.*********** Both vessels belong to the Dutch shipping company Vroon.

30.07., distress case AG, 20 persons, illegal interception and pullback by the so-called Libyan Coast Guard in the Maltese (!) SAR zone, likely coordinated by Frontex, NGO vessel in the vicinity not informed. Seabird’s crew spotted the illegal interception of around 20 persons in the Maltese (!) SAR zone by the so-called Libyan Coast Guard, which already had around 50 persons on its deck. In the Maltese SAR zone, it is the duty of the Maltese authorities to coordinate rescue operations and to ensure that persons in distress are brought to a place of safety, as enshrined within international maritime law. As well as the monitoring aircraft Seabird, the rescue vessel Sea-Watch 3 also had a visual on the interception and was the closest vessel with rescue capacity, though was never informed by any authority. The Frontex drone was on-scene with the distress case three times before the interception. We must then assume that Frontex coordinated the interception.

31.07, distress case AH, 11 persons: non-assistance by the merchant vessel Vos Apollo and consequent interception and pullback by the so-called Libyan Coast Guard. Seabird’s crew spotted 11 persons in distress in the Libyan SAR zone. The merchant vessel Vos Apollo, flying the flag of Gibraltar, was in close vicinity to the people, but remained unresponsive to the calls of Seabird’s crew on the radio and did not change course towards the boat in distress. The people were intercepted by a so-called Libyan Coast Guard patrol boat shortly afterwards and pulled back to Libya.

31.07., interceptions and pullbacks to Libya, two unknown persons driving the intercepted boat back to Libya. On 2 occasions on 31.07., Seabird’s crew were on-scene of interceptions by the so-called Libyan Coast Guard in the Libyan SAR zone, where the boats were already empty. In the first incident, 65 persons had been intercepted by the so-called Libyan Coast Guard and were already on board their patrol boat when Seabird’s crew arrived on-scene. In the second incident, when Seabird’s crew arrived on-scene, the so-called Libyan Coast Guard patrol boat Khalil************ had intercepted around 50 persons and the boat of said persons was empty. Whereas the Khalil was heading back to Tripoli, Seabird’s crew observed that two unknown persons wearing civilian clothes, who likely went onboard the intercepted wooden boat from the patrol boat, were driving it back to Libya.

In July 2021, we believe that Frontex’s drone was involved in a total of at least 11 distress cases. Four of these were presumably intercepted and pulled back to Libya by the so-called Libyan Coast Guard. Four arrived independently or were rescued by the Italian authorities and the NGO vessel Ocean Viking and disembarked in Italy. The outcomes for three boats remain unknown.

In July 2021, the crews of Seabird and Moonbird spotted 31 empty boats: 12 in the Maltese SAR zone, 18 in the Libyan SAR zone and 1 at the Maltese and Libyan SAR boundary. None of these were likely boats spotted on the day before by the crews when there were still people on board. 1 boat was likely rescued by the Italian authorities and disembarked in Lampedusa. 7 boats are believed to have been intercepted and pulled back to Libya. The outcomes for the other 23 empty boats remain unknown.

These missions highlight once again: