A ruling destined to mark a turning point in European case law: the court on the island of Samos has acquitted 11 asylum seekers of charges related to facilitating irregular immigration. The accusations stemmed solely from the fact that they had taken control of the boat that brought them to Greek shores. This is an unprecedented decision within the context of European migration policies, which for years have been characterised by an increasing criminalization of autonomous migratory movement.
A Historic Ruling
The court recognised that the mere act of steering a boat – in the absence of profit motive or connections to trafficking networks – does not constitute a crime. The decision affirms what has long been denounced by lawyers, activists, and international organisations: seeking asylum is not a crime, and steering a boat to save oneself and others from war or persecution cannot be equated with human trafficking.
The organization Human Rights Legal Project (HRLP), which represented 9 of the 11 defendants, called the ruling “a milestone” and “a necessary step toward a more just future.”
Groups such as Aegean Migrant Solidarity and Community Peacemaker Teams, which closely followed the trial and provided legal, media, and humanitarian support to the asylum seekers involved, emphasized that this ruling is merely “the bare minimum”. Under international law, individuals should never be punished for being trafficked, whether they are asylum seekers or not. Criminalization in such cases is not only unlawful but profoundly immoral.
The Principle of Protection: The Geneva Convention
A key pillar of the defence was Article 31 of the 1951 Geneva Convention, which states that a person entering a country irregularly to seek asylum must not be penalized, provided they present themselves to the authorities promptly and can justify their mode of entry.
In the Greek context – and more broadly across Europe – this principle has often been disregarded. As a result, hundreds of asylum seekers have been prosecuted and imprisoned with harsh sentences merely for having held the rudder during their crossing of the Aegean Sea.
The “boat drivers” practice: survival criminalized
In recent years, thousands of people in Greece have been arrested on “migrant smuggling” charges, despite being migrants themselves seeking protection. These so-called boat drivers are often individuals who, out of desperation or necessity, volunteer to steer the boat in exchange for a free passage, or do so in emergencies, when the designated driver is unable to continue the journey.
According to data collected by Borderline Europe, Watch the Med – Alarm Phone, and Refugee Support Aegean (RSA), Greece has the highest number of detainees for migrant smuggling offenses in the entire EU, with sentences that can reach up to 100 years in prison.
The significance of the Samos verdict is twofold: legal and symbolic. Legal, because it consists of 11 consecutive acquittals a clear break from standard practice. Symbolic, because it represents an official recognition of the innocence of those simply trying to survive, challenging a security-centered narrative that frames irregular migration as a public order issue rather than a humanitarian one.
Justice is not (yet) equal for all
Of the original twelve defendants, one was convicted: the only individual who was unable to prove they had applied for asylum or intended to do so. This highlights how fragile and subjective the boundary is between “migrant to be protected” and “person to be punished.”
Furthermore, all those acquitted had already spent between six and ten months in pre-trial detention, often under harsh prison conditions and with limited access to interpreters or qualified legal defense. Preventive detention is frequently used as a form of deterrence and pre-emptive punishment, in clear violation of the presumption of innocence.
Toward Systemic Change?
The Samos verdict opens the door to new legal defense strategies and may be used as a precedent in future similar cases. However, deeper change is needed: a European harmonization that prevents the punitive use of criminal law against migrants.
This case raises critical questions for the European Union, particularly concerning respect for fundamental rights, the principle of non-discrimination, and the proportionality of sentencing for those crossing borders to save their lives.
The Samos ruling does not close a chapter – it opens many more. It is a victory for law and dignity, the result of the perseverance of lawyers, activists, observers, and the very people who were unjustly accused. But it also serves as a bitter reminder: justice often must be fought for inch by inch.
Steering a boat to survive is not a crime. The fight for freedom of movement continues.
Sources:
