NGOs Urge EU to Stop Funding Tunisia Over Human Rights Abuses
On a coalition of 46 humanitarian organizations demanded that the European Union terminate funding for Tunisian migration enforcement, citing documented human rights abuses. Three years after the signing of the EU-Tunisia Memorandum of Understanding, critics report that the deal has institutionalized violence against migrants and asylum seekers.
The Human Cost of the 2023 Memorandum of Understanding
The July 16, 2023, agreement between the European Union and the Tunisian government was designed to curb irregular migration across the Mediterranean. The European Commission committed EUR 105 million to support these efforts, with at least EUR 65 million specifically allocated for training and equipping the Tunisian Coast Guard and Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre.
Evidence gathered by humanitarian groups, including Human Rights Watch and SOS Humanity, indicates that this funding has facilitated systemic violations. Marie Michel, a policy expert at SOS Humanity, noted that rescued individuals consistently report torture, sexual violence, and racial abuse at the hands of security forces. These reports describe a cycle of violence where intercepted migrants are returned to detention centers or expelled to desert border regions.
The situation has deteriorated to the point where many observers describe the environment for migrants in Tunisia as an “open-air prison.” For those attempting to document these abuses or provide basic survival aid, the risks are significant. Tunisian authorities have increasingly targeted civil society groups, leading to the prosecution of aid workers and the suspension of UNHCR asylum processing since June 2024.
Institutional Complicity and the “Safe Country” Designation
The controversy is compounded by the European Union’s February 2026 decision to classify Tunisia as a “safe country of origin.” This designation contradicts reports from the United Nations and independent watchdogs that characterize the current Tunisian political climate as increasingly authoritarian. Under President Kais Saied, the state has systematically dismantled judicial independence and curtailed the activities of nongovernmental organizations.
Legal experts argue that the EU’s continued financial support for the Tunisian National Guard and police creates a direct link between European policy and local repression. Because the same security apparatus responsible for maritime interdictions is also responsible for the domestic crackdown on political dissent, the distinction between “migration control” and “political suppression” has effectively vanished.
For organizations and individuals operating in high-risk zones, navigating the intersection of international policy and local enforcement requires specialized support.
Regional Consequences of the Migration Crackdown
The rise in xenophobic rhetoric from Tunisian officials has had tangible, violent consequences for Black Africans, including both migrants and Tunisian nationals. Emma Cabrol of Avocats Sans Frontières reports that legal assistance mechanisms have seen a dramatic surge in requests from individuals who have been forcibly evicted or subjected to arbitrary detention.
The structural barriers to housing and employment are now so severe that many asylum seekers are left with no legal recourse. As the EU maintains its financial commitment to the Tunisian state, the burden of managing this humanitarian crisis often falls on local civil society actors who are themselves under threat of arrest.
Furthermore, the lack of transparency in how EU funds are monitored has drawn criticism from the European Court of Auditors. Despite these warnings, the European Commission has not yet provided evidence that its operational support complies with EU human rights safeguards. For those currently trapped in the crossfire of this geopolitical stalemate, the need for SOS Humanity is growing, even as the space for these services to operate within Tunisia continues to shrink.
A Policy Divergence: Migration Control versus Human Rights
The core of the dispute rests on whether the EU is prioritizing border security over its own legal obligations. Friederike Mager, Senior Coordinator for EU Advocacy at Human Rights Watch, emphasized that the EU’s current approach is fundamentally flawed. By prioritizing migration control at the expense of human rights, the EU risks entrenching an authoritarian system that it claims to oppose.
As the three-year anniversary of the MoU passes, the pressure on Brussels to implement clear, enforceable benchmarks is intensifying. Without a shift in policy, the cycle of violence is likely to continue, leaving thousands of people in a state of indefinite limbo. The current trajectory suggests that until the EU decouples its border security funding from the internal repressive apparatus of the Tunisian state, the human rights violations documented today will remain an entrenched feature of the region’s migration landscape.
The failure to address these abuses now will only solidify the legal and humanitarian crises facing North Africa for years to come.