Sea Watch on April 23 issued a statement warning Italian authorities it was unwilling to take orders from the Libyan coast guard. "They can't force us to take orders from the so-called Libyan coast guard," explained the German NGO.

It also emphasized that complying with such demands would mean violating international law and committing crimes against humanity.

Sea Watch denounced Italian authorities' continuous pressure on their crews to engage in illegal pushbacks in collaboration with the Libyan coast guard.

Also read: Italy's top court: Handing over migrants to Libyan coast guards is illegal

Violation of non-refoulement

"Handing over rescued people to the authorities of a country where fundamental rights are violated constitutes a crime and a violation of the principle of non-refoulement, as noted by the sentences of the European Court of Human Rights and the Cassation Court", the statement said.

"It is for this reason that Sea Watch has cautioned the Italian maritime rescue coordination center against continuing with this system: stop threatening our vessels with administrative sanctions in order to force us to remain silent or to cooperate with those violating the human rights of migrant people on a daily basis."

"Libya is not a safe country, its 'coast guard' is an armed entity that pushes people back and perpetrates all kinds of violence against those who are fleeing, including shooting them, as repeatedly witnessed by our reconnaissance aircraft," it concluded. Sea-Watch stressed that its search and rescue operations have saved over 45,000 lives to date.

Also read: Sea-Watch slams Italian authorities for detaining its rescue ship

Sea-Watch vs. Frontex ruling

Meanwhile on Wednesday, April 24, Sea-Watch lost a legal battle against Frontex over access to documents at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).

The case dates back to October 2021 when Sea-Watch requested access to documents from Frontex related to a July 30, 2021 air operation in the Central Mediterranean. The documents included reports, communications, minutes, photographs, and videos. Sea-Watch wanted to make sure that Frontex and the authorities of Member States did not infringe the principle of non-refoulement during the operation, the CJEU press statement notes.

The judges in Luxembourg largely rejected the arguments put forward by Sea-Watch; however, they partially annulled Frontex's decision because the agency refused access to all 73 requested photos and videos but provided reasoning for only 71 documents, reports the German news agency KNA.

Frontex cited exceptions to document access rights, including public security concerns. Moreover, Frontex refused to make partial disclosure of those documents, "on the ground that the amount of information that would have to be redacted would be disproportionate to the residual information that could be disclosed and that such a process would undermine the principle of sound administration," the CJEU press statement said.

The court ruled for Sea-Watch to cover half of Frontex's costs, and an appeal can be filed within two months and 10 days. In a press statement, Sea-Watch Head of Advocacy Marie Naass said: "If we want to prevent human rights violations at the EU’s borders, those responsible must be held accountable. Today, the Court has failed to ensure this. Frontex Director Leitjens can still show that he is serious about his announced transparency. We call on him to publish all requested documents and the withheld images."

Also read: Frontex hit by lawsuit amid further allegations over pushbacks